Chambliss v. Chambliss

• Docket Number: 2023-CA-00087-COA
• Decision Date: 27 February 2024
• Citation: 385 So. 3d 1246
• Parties: Laura J. CHAMBLISS, Appellant v. Chad Eric CHAMBLISS, Appellee
• Court: Mississippi Court of Appeals

385 So.3d 1246

Laura J. CHAMBLISS, Appellant

v.Chad Eric CHAMBLISS, Appellee

NO. 2023-CA-00087-COA

Court of Appeals of Mississippi.

11/07/2023

Rehearing Denied February 27, 2024

LAMAR COUNTY CHANCERY COURT, HON. DEBORAH J. GAMBRELL, JUDGE

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: WILLIAM E. ANDREWS III

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: SHAWN M. LOWREY, Hattiesburg

BEFORE CARLTON, P.J., WESTBROOKS AND EMFINGER, JJ.

WESTBROOKS, J., FOR THE COURT:

¶1.Chad Chambliss and Laura Chambliss married on August 15, 1987.They divorced after nine years; however, they began living with each other two months later.They eventually remarried on May 10, 2011.Eleven years later, they separated, and Laura filed for divorce.On November 10, 2022, the Lamar County Chancery Court entered a judgment granting a divorce to Laura on the ground of adultery.The court ordered Chad to pay Laura thirty percent of his Merrill Lynch retirement account and $1,800 per year for twelve years to allow her to purchase health insurance.The court also ordered Chad to pay $3,500 toward Laura’s attorney’s fees.On appeal, Laura contends that the chancellor erred by not awarding her (1) any portion of Chad’s two other investment accounts; (2) the amount of the distribution of the Merrill Lynch account; (3) alimony; and (4) sufficient attorney’s fees.Finding no error, we affirm the chancery court’s final judgment.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶2.After Laura and Chad were married, they welcomed their first child in March 1988.They divorced based on irreconcilable differences on December 12, 1996, and spent two months apart.Eventually they reconciled and began living with each other again in 1997.They welcomed their second child in March 1998.Laura and Chad decided to remarry on May 10, 2011.They testified that one of the reasons they got remarried was to get Laura on Chad’s health insurance that was offered through his employer.

¶3.Chad provided the primary source of income in the family.Both he and Laura admitted that he paid for all the family expenses.In addition to being responsible for all expenses, Chad also made some investments.From 1996 to 2011, Chad created and contributed to two separate retirement accounts with AIG and Bancorp-South.These accounts had a value of $91,598.41 and $40,922.26, respectively.Their growth was completely passive after 2011.Chad created and contributed to another retirement account with Merrill Lynch after he and Laura remarried in 2011.This account had a value of $204,863.58.

¶4.Laura was responsible for taking care of the children and maintaining the home.Chad testified that she did little cleaning and that his mother helped take care of the children.Laura was also responsible for tending to the farm animals that they owned on their property.Laura testified that she attempted to go back to school in 2005, but she never completed the degree and incurred around $17,000 in student loan debt.Laura further testified that the last time she was employed was in 2008 when she worked for a table-cloths servicer for restaurants and businesses owned by Kim Bradley.She claimed that Chad did not allow her to have a job.Chad testified that he tried to get her to work after the children were grown, but she refused to get a job.

¶5.Laura claimed that she could no longer work because of rheumatoid arthritis, degenerative arthritis in her spine, neuropathy that affects her balance, and raptured disks in her back.She had two surgeries on her back and claimed that she would need another back surgery due to a chipped bone.She had also had two surgeries on her vocal cords.She claimed that she received therapy for her balance and had to take medications for her different ailments.Despite all these purported medical issues, there was no testimony from a physician to support these claims, and Laura’s attorney admitted during trial that "[s]he does not qualify for disability of any sort."

¶6.Laura admitted that she used marijuana to help with the pain in her joints.She testified that she received money from Chad every week to purchase marijuana, and she smoked four to five nights out of the week.She said that she had been using it ever since she first met Chad.Chad testified that her marijuana use caused difficulties in their marriage.He said, "[S]he always wanted to go smoke and sit on the porch with married men and her friends ….I didn’t like it."He also claimed that she misspent marital assets due to her smoking habit.Laura was not prescribed to use marijuana by a physician.She claimed her physician referred her to a medical marijuana specialist; however, it would be months before the specialist could assess her for a medical marijuana prescription.

¶7.After eleven years of marriage, Laura and Chad separated on January 10, 2022.Chad testified that two to three years before the separation, they"couldn’t get along" and were "fighting and fussing."He also testified that he was often away from home because his job stationed him in Yazoo City.He claimed that he only came home on weekends to see his grandchildren, and he slept on the couch while he was there.

¶8.Laura, on the other hand, testified that the reason they separated was because Chad began having a relationship with another woman.Laura claimed that she knew about their relationship for a while, but she could never find proof until Chad and his girlfriend created a joint Facebook account showcasing their relationship.Laura filed her complaint for divorce on March 28, 2022, alleging that she was entitled to a divorce on the grounds of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment, abandonment, desertion, and adultery.In her complaint, Laura requested temporary relief to assist her until a trial on the merits was held.

¶9.The court entered a temporary order on June 13, 2022.In the order, the court established the date of demarcation for the estate assets as June 2, 2022.The court ordered Chad to pay Laura $1,200 monthly in spousal support and to continue paying her health and car insurance.The court also ordered Laura and Chad to divide their checking and savings accounts at BancorpSouth.Chad filed his answer to the complaint on October 13, 2022.

¶10.The trial was held on October 18, 2022.At the conclusion of the trial, the court took the matters under advisement.On November 10, 2022, the court entered its "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Opinion and Final Judgment."In this order, the court acknowledged that Chad admitted to adultery and granted Laura a divorce based on that ground.The court also acknowledged Laura’s dissipation of assets due to her marijuana use and Chad’s testimony about it causing problems in their marriage and resulting in their last separation.The court took this evidence into consideration and found that Chad was entitled to seventy percent of the Merrill Lynch retirement account ($139,282.92), and Laura was entitled to thirty percent ($59,692.68).The court found that the value of their personalty was $98,377, and Laura was entitled to fifty percent of it.Additionally, due to Laura’s health conditions and the disparity in their incomes, the court ordered Chad to pay Laura $1,800 per year for twelve years to allow her to purchase health insurance and $3,500 toward her attorney’s fees.Lastly, the chancellor declined to award her alimony because she had divided the assets such that alimony was not necessary.

¶11.Laura filed a "Motion to Reconsider, Alter or Amend Final Judgment" on November 15, 2022.The court then entered an "Order Clarifying in Part the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Opinion and Final Judgment" on December 29, 2022.In this order, the court denied Laura’s motion and provided more in-depth findings for why the AIG and BancorpSouth IRA accounts were non-marital and not entitled to an equitable distribution.Laura filed a notice of appeal on January 23, 2023.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

[1–3]¶12."This Court employs a limited standard of review of property division and distribution in divorce cases."Parrish v. Parrish,245 So. 3d 519, 522 (¶5)(Miss. Ct. App. 2017)."This Court will not disturb the findings of a chancellor when supported by substantial evidence unless the chancellor abused [her] discretion, was manifestly wrong, clearly erroneous or an erroneous legal standard was applied."Sanderson v. Sanderson,824 So. 2d 623, 625-26 (¶8)(Miss. 2002)."We do not substitute our ‘judgment for that of the chancellor, even if [we disagree] with the findings of fact and would arrive at a different conclusion.’ "Rhodes v. Rhodes,52 So. 3d 430, 435 (¶15)(Miss. Ct. App. 2011)(quotingCoggin v. Coggin,837 So. 2d 772, 774 (¶3)(Miss. Ct. App. 2003)).

[4–6]¶13."A trial judge’s award of attorneys’ fees is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard, and the award of attorneys’ fees must be supported by credible evidence."McNeese v. McNeese,119 So. 3d 264, 274 (¶26)(Miss. 2013)."Alimony awards are also within the sound discretion of the chancellor."Reynolds v. Reynolds,287 So. 3d 1019, 1023 (¶7)(Miss. Ct. App. 2019)(citingSpeed v. Speed, 757 So. 2d 221, 224 (¶6)(Miss. 2000))."In matters that are questions of law, [appellate courts] employ a de novo standard of review and will only reverse for an erroneous interpretation or application of the law."Morgan v. West,812 So. 2d 987, 990 (¶8)(Miss. 2002).

I. Non-marital Assets (AIG and BancorpSouth Accounts)

[7]¶14.Laura argues that the chancellor erred by not awarding her any portion of Chad’s AIG and BancorpSouth IRA accounts.Chad and Laura were not married during the years Chad made contributions to these accounts; however, Laura argues that she is entitled to an equitable distribution of these accounts because she and Chad were previously married and continued living together after the divorce.We disagree.

[8–11]¶15.Equitable distribution "is committed to the discretion and conscience of the [c]ourt, having in mind all of the equities and other relevant...